A HISTORY OF NORFOLK 



quartered upon them by royal authority. Thus 

 William Dautre, an old servant of the king and 

 his father, who had obtained life lodgement at 

 Pentney in 1318, was transferred to Holm in 

 1 32 1, there to receive the necessaries of life in 

 the place of Roger Ussher, deceased.^ The 

 result of all these onerous burdens and losses 

 through acts of oppression is seen in 1344 when 

 the abbot and convent successfully petitioned 

 Clement VI for the appropriation of the church 

 of North Walsham, value 62 marks, signifying 

 that they had by lay power lost their appro- 

 priated church of Scottow, and that their 

 possessions were greatly reduced by floods, op- 

 pressions, and the duties of hospitality.^ It was 

 probably on similar grounds that Boniface IX, in 

 1 40 1, sanctioned the appropriation of the church 

 of Ashby, in this diocese, to the mensa of the 

 monks of Holm.' 



The most notable instance of violence, how- 

 ever, from which the abbey suffered was in 1381 

 when the revolted peasantry attacked it in the 

 hope of capturing the bishop of Norwich, whom 

 they believed to be within its walls.* Although 

 unsuccessful in this object they were able to 

 compel the abbot to surrender his court rolls, 

 which they burnt in company with those of the 

 priories of Norwich and Carrow. When the 

 rising had been suppressed the abbot set about 

 making a fresh series of rolls, and it is much to 

 his credit that he did not take advantage of his 

 defeated tenants to increase their services, but 

 allowed them to remain exactly as they were 

 before the insurrection.' In the autumn of the 

 following year, 1382, a fresh rising was planned 

 in Norfolk, of which the chief feature was the 

 design of seizing the abbey of St. Benet and 

 occupying it as a fortress, for which its strength 

 made it very suitable ; the plot, however, leaked 

 out, and the scheme was nipped in the bud.* 



Among the Norwich city muniments are 

 many fifteenth-century documents relative to the 

 prolonged disputes between the abbot of Holm 

 and the mayor as to the alleged damage done 

 to the abbot by new mills on the River 

 Wensum. An award of the Earl of Suffolk was 

 given against the citizens in 1442, ordering them 

 to sign a bond of ;^ioo to the abbot in default 

 of obedience. The city refused and rose in 

 rebellion, the mayor was arrested and imprisoned 

 in the Fleet, and the abbot's party destroyed the 

 mills. The city liberties were forfeited for four 

 years, and during that time a bond of ;^iOO was 

 signed. The mills were rebuilt in the reign of 

 Edward IV, c. 1482, and the abbot sued the 



' Close, 14 Edw. II, m. ^d. 

 ' Cal. Papal Pet. i, 36 ; Cal. Papal Reg. iii, 116, 

 176. 



' Cal. Papal Reg. v, 415. 



* Powell, The Rising in East Angl'ia, 33. 



* Antiquarj, xxix, 215. 



' Chron. Anglia (Rolls Ser.), 354. 



city for damages, but the decision was against 

 the abbey, on the grounds of the illegality of the 

 bond, which had been signed when the mayor 

 was in prison.' 



Licence was granted by Henry VI on 

 25 October, 1470, during his brief resumption 

 of royal power, for the prior and convent to 

 elect to the vacancy caused by the resignation 

 of Abbot John Keling. On 16 November the 

 king signified to the bishop his assent to the 

 election of Thomas Pakefield, cellarer of Holm 

 and professor of theology, and the temporalities 

 in Norfolk and Suffolk were restored to him on 

 the 26th.* In December, 1 47 1, Edward IV 

 confirmed this election and pardoned the tres- 

 passes alleged by accepting the licence and assent 

 of Henry VI.^ 



Bishop Goldwell visited the abbey on 15 July, 

 1494, when Robert Cubitt, the abbot, John 

 Bay, the prior, and twenty-two monks were 

 severally and privately examined. The report 

 shows that there was considerable laxity of 

 discipline ; the door of the dorter was left open 

 and seculars entered by day and night, and often 

 there was no light there ; silence was not well 

 observed in quire ; the monks were overburdened 

 with recitals of the psalms, hymns, and canticles, 

 and no time was left for study, according to the 

 rule of St. Benedict and the local statutes ; 

 there was no clock in the monastery ; the 

 younger brethren were impudent to their elders 

 and the servants insolent ; there was no school- 

 master for the novices ; many of the abbey 

 jewels were in pawn ; the late abbot had given 

 the vicarage of St. Peter's, Hoveton, to a relative 

 of his own ; the present abbot had too many 

 servants ; the steward had the abbey evidences 

 in his own house ; and the court rolls were not^ 

 entered on parchment.^" 



Bishop Nicke visited Holm in July, 15 14,. 

 when twenty-three monks were examined.^ 

 Eleven of the number reported ' omnia bene ' ; but 

 John Rising testified that there was a conspiracy 

 among many of the monks to report nothing. 

 John Tacolston, prior, said that the abbot 

 returned no accounts. Robert Cowper, sub- 

 prior, said that during the vacancy of the monas- 

 tery he had lost two pieces of silver plate and 

 two masers. The prior was accused by several 

 of not rising for mattins, and he was suspected of 

 incontinency. The abbot retained such offices 

 as cellarer, sacrist, and almoner in his own hands. 

 There were no lights in the dorter and no seats 

 in the cloister. The bishop enjoined that the- 

 abbot should for the future present his accounts 

 to the convent on St. Clement's Day, and that 



' The whole case is set forth in great length ia 

 the Liber Albus, 66-91, and printed in Hudson and 

 Tingey, Rec. of City o/Nortu. i, 348. 



* Pat. 49 Hen. VI, m. 20, 19, 18. 



' Ibid. II £dw. IV, pt. ii, m. 21. 



'" Jessopp, None. Visit. (Camd. Soc), 60-3. 



s 



334 



